Customer Reviews

Who really wrote the book of Mormon?

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Cult researcher Walter Martin wrote the Foreword to this 1980 book, in which he said, "After extensive research into ... the Mormon Church 25 years ago, I was convinced that I knew the true source of 'The Book of Mormon'... Although some agreed with me, most thought that my assertion of Spalding's part in the mystery of Mormonism was the assertion of one naive of the facts. For 25 years I have known that the Spalding source could be proved if one only had the time and the dedication to ferret it out. Wayne Cowdrey, Don Scales, and Howard Davis have had that dedication, and this book is the result."

(It should be noted that, in addition to criticisms of this theory by Mormons, Christian anti-Mormon writers Jerald and Sandra Tanner also rejected the theory in their book, Did Spalding write the Book of Mormon?. Cowdrey and Davis have also more recently expanded and updated their arguments in the book, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon?: The Spalding Enigma.)

The authors write in the Introduction, "After hundreds of hours of painstaking research, we have come to a firm and studied conviction: The Book of Mormon is not a genuine revelation from God at all, but was derived from a novel written by Solomon Spalding... titled 'The Manuscript Found.' We ask only that you read this book carefully and come to your own reasoned conclusion as to the true source of The Book of Mormon."

Here are some other quotations from the book:

"The Spalding theory was not something newly contrived in the twentieth century, but was a volatile issue from the very beginning of Mormonism." (Pg. 51)
"Clearly, (Sidney) Rigdon knew more than he was telling... He knew more than a Campbellite preacher unfamiliar with the Golden Bible should know, who claimed never to have heard of it until the end of 1830." (Pg. 114)
"The reason for establishing the important distinction between the two known novels of Spalding is that his FIRST novel has been heralded by Mormons for years as 'proof' that the minister's work was different from The Book of Mormon." (Pg. 160)
"(Handwriting expert) Doulder examined both sets of originals, but his second opinion contradicted his own first report..." (Pg. 175)
(Howard C. Ross-Doulder) "It is my conclusion the handwriting in the name of Solomon Spalding is NOT the author of the unidentified pages..." (Pg. 186)

Not a lot of people know about Solomon Spaulding and his book "Manuscript Story," a romantic account of native Americans who were in fact the lost tribes of Israel, or so the story goes. The authors of this book, while sometimes a bit over-the-top in their zeal to debunk the source of the Book of Mormon nonetheless do a good job of documenting some facts and some speculations. This tome is a good one for the shelf of anyone interested in Mormon or mainstream Christian apologetics. The price is rather low and good copies can yet be found.

This book was the most revealing book I've ever read. It showed me in a factual way the truth about the Book of Mormon. I encourage anyone seeking the truth to read this book. It is written in an unbiased way. It leaves you to make your own conclusion. It just presents the facts.

First, let me correct the false impression that I am Massimo Introvigne. I don;t know how that name became attached to my Amazon account from whom I regularly purchase books etc. My name is Ronnie Bray. I have approached Amazon about this but nothing has changed.

www.yorkshiretales.com/allaboutmormonism

The Spaulding [or Spalding] theory of origin for the Book of Mormon was exploded when the Spaulding manuscript came to light in C19! The upholders of the Solomon Spaulding myth are not only at variance with each other, but that all their assertions are inconsistent with the well-known facts associated with its discovery; and when we proceed further to examine the internal evidence of the book we very soon discover that the conglomeration of conjectures, guesses, suppositions, etc., of which this "Spaulding
story" is formed is "as unstable as water" and utterly unworthy of belief.

The Latter-day Saints' [Mormons] view of the Book of Mormon is that it is the word of God brought to the world by the hand of God. Other theories have been proposed and although each of these has been discredited they are still tendered as the origin of the Book of Mormon. These theories have been constructed so well that, with a single exception, they have survived. Mormons accept the Book of Mormon as the Word of God and of equal authority with the Bible: anti-Mormons have to decide which of the conflicting theories of origin is supported by the evidence. The theories are:

* It is the Word of God. (Divine) theory 1.
* Joseph Smith Is the sole author. (Fraud) theory 2.
* Sidney Rigdon conspired with Smith to produce it. (Conspiracy and fraud) theory 3.
* It derived from Solomon Spaulding's "Manuscript Found". (Plagiarism and fraud) theory 4.
* Smith conspired with others, notably Oliver Cowdery and Parley P. Pratt theory 5.
* to produce the book. (Conspiracy and fraud) theory 6.
* It was the fraudulent production of a man named Walters. (Fraud) theory 7.

The third theory has Rigdon as author and co-conspirator of a fraudulent literary work, whereas the fourth theory claims that Rigdon stole Spaulding's work and then conspired with Smith to present it as the Book of Mormon and rests on the view that Rigdon stole the manuscript of a novel written by one Solomon Spaulding, which tells of a party of travellers from ancient Rome. The party, led by a man called Fabius, was sailing from Rome to Britain when they were caught up in a severe storm. As a consequence of which they arrived not at Britain, but at the American continent which they found inhabited by two warring tribes. Melvin R Brooks writes:

The manuscript contains about one-tenth the reading matter of the Book of Mormon, and is anything but religious throughout. In many places the reader of the Spaulding Manuscript may find obscenity. The main theme revolves about a romance between Elseon and Lamesa.

The Spaulding Theory is the brain-child of former Mormon Philastus Hurlburt, for inclusion in Eber D. Howe's Mormonism Unvailed. He alleged that Spaulding left his Manuscript Found in Lambdin and Patterson's print shop in Pittsburgh from where Rigdon stole it. Some accounts have Rigdon "regularly frequenting" the printers; others have him working there as a compositor. After the alleged theft he is said to have added some religious language to the text and then have Smith "discover" it with the aid of an "imaginary angel."

Mormonism Unvailed published in 1834, was not Howe's first attack on Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. He was the publisher of the Painesville Telegraph, of Painesville, Ohio, and had published many articles hostile to the church. Although the book was published naming Howe as the author, there are good reasons for believing that it was the work of Hurlburt, written in a spirit of revenge after Hurlburt's lewd character had been exposed in a church court for which he was excommunicated. He was later bound over by a Civil court for the attempted murder of Joseph Smith.

Hurlburt Manuscript Found from his Hurlburt's remarried widow, Mrs Davidson. He claimed that it proved beyond doubt that it was the origin of the Book of Mormon, yet in spite of this assertion he did not publish it. If it was the primary source of the Book of Mormon why did he fail to publish it? His failure to publish Manuscript Found was not the only strange thing in the case of Hurlburt and the manuscript. He borrowed it from Spaulding's widow promising to return it to her. It was a promise he did not keep. Had he published The Manuscript Story and proved that the Book of Mormon's dependence on it it could have been the end of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and his thriving community. Yet it was not published but merely referred to in the following terms:

"We have shown that the Book of Mormon is the Joint production of Solomon Spaulding and some other designing knave...nor will anyone disagree with us, when we shall have proven that the Book of Mormon was a joint speculation between the "author and proprietor" and the witnesses."

At one point it is admitted by Howe that as far as the conspiracy theory is concerned,

"...we have no positive proof; but many circumstances have carried a suspicious appearance; and further developments may establish the fact." [There were no 'further developments' except proof that the Book of Mormon is entirely independent of Spaulding, whose manuscript is published and available cheaply from Amazon].

In spite of the assurances given throughout the book that the Spaulding manuscript was plagiarised in the production of the Book of Mormon, the final passage of Howe's book sounds the death knell for the Spaulding theory, especially in light of the manuscript's discovery in 1885.

"We, therefore, must hold out Sidney Rigdon to the world as being the original "Author and Proprietor" of the whole Mormon conspiracy, until further light is elicited upon the lost writings of Solomon Spaulding."

This statement is not that of one who has incontrovertible proof, rather it points to absence of proof, Howe is content to impute not only the authorship of the Book of Mormon to Rigdon but "the whole Mormon conspiracy." Generations of authors have been content to let their opinions rest upon this ricketty foundation and to present those opinions in the guise of "scholarly research."

It is undisputed that Hurlburt obtained Manuscript Found and that he never dared publish it. What is less certain is how writers hostile to the Book of Mormon take any comfort from Hurlburt's failure to produce his evidence but continue to spread the story in desperate attempts to prolong the falsehood that Hurlburt began. They fail to convince because the evidence for the theory is non-existent.

Hurlburt did not shrink from dishonesty in seeking to injure his former friends and elevate his own reputation. When it became evident that the manuscript had disappeared rumours were circulated that the Mormons had either bought or stolen the manuscript, and burned it to destroy evidence of their fraud. It would have made sense for the Mormons to hide the manuscript if it proved them party to a fraud, but why did Hurlburt and Howe hide it if it proved their proposition?

For fifty years the Spaulding Theory reigned unchallenged, and was an embarrassment to Latter Day Saints - nothing more. For fifty years Manuscript Found was held to be the source of the Book of Mormon and its non-appearance prevented comparison. During this time no other theory of origin was produced because none was necessary. The Spaulding theory was finally collapsed in 1883 when Manuscript Found was discovered in Honolulu and placed in the library of Oberlin College, Columbus, Ohio, where it remains.

Had it not been discovered it is certain that enemies of the Church would have not have had to invent other explanations for the Book of Mormon.

With the manuscript available for comparison it was plainly evident that the Book of Mormon was not derived from Spaulding's work. When this was recognized another theory was hurriedly invented claiming that the Book of Mormon was based not on Spaulding's Manuscript Found, but on another of his works, Manuscript Lost, a work not mentioned prior to the collapse of the Spaulding theory. In spite of the evidence of Manuscript Found and the non-appearance of Manuscript Lost, the theory of a Spaulding origin remains current amongst of anti-Mormon writers lacking objectivity and honesty. For the sake of their own prejudices and presuppositions they discount the crushing weight of evidence against a Spaulding contribution to the Book of Mormon.

For example, the unsupported claim is made that, "a novel was left by Solomon Spaulding in Patterson's Printing Office at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Sidney Regdon [sic] found it and with Joseph's help, he invented a story about gold plates and spectacles. Smith professed to translate it and thus we have the Mormon Bible."

Baird claims an unreferenced source for an interesting piece of information, not discoverable elsewhere. It concerns a note allegedly written by Spaulding's physician on 5th June 1831 on the flyleaf of a Book of Mormon.

"This work, I am convinced by facts related to me by deceased patient, Solomon Spaulding, has been made from the writings of Spaulding, probably by Sidney Rigdon, who was suspicioned by Spaulding with purloining his manuscript from the publishing-house to which he had taken it; and I am prepared to testify that Spaulding told me that his work was entitled, "The Manuscript Found in the Wilds of Mormon; or Unearthed Records of the Nephites". From his description of its contents, I fully believe that this Book of Mormon is mainly and wickedly copied from it. June, 5, 1831 Cephas Dodd."

It is noteworthy that Dodd's testimony is clearly spurious since it contains too many essential elements of the Spaulding Theory at too early a date, referred to the Manuscript Found. No other Spaulding work had entered the picture, because until the discovery of the manuscript, which immediately disqualified it, none other was necessary. Baird cites another unique source, similarly unreferenced.

"Rigdon told his friends of what he had done [stolen the Spaulding manuscript and colluded with Smith to manufacture the Book of Mormon from it] but did not declare it publicly for fear of Mormon reprisal. "

He refers to Cowdery, Davis and Scales' book, Who Really Wrote the Book Of Mormon? and to their claim that they have
[Resurfaced] part of Spaulding's original manuscript of his second novel. Twelve pages, word for word the "Book of Mormon", have been examined by handwriting-analysis experts who identified the handwriting as Solomon's [sic] Spaulding's. These pages have been preserved for years by the "Mormon" Church. They are known by the Church as the "unidentified scribe" section of the original, handwritten Book of Mormon.

Another writer who will not relinquish the Spaulding Theory in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it, is Linnegan who writes:

""[Smith] was joined by one Samuel [sic] Rigdon with whose assistance it seems likely that Smith added further chapters [to the Book of Mormon]".

Forrest Brinkerhoff, a Christadelphian, in his disappointing and mean-spirited little book Mormonism - An Historical And Scriptural Analysis, is also convinced of a Spaulding origin.

"Solomon Spaulding, wrote a fictional historical novel called "MANUSCRIPT LOST" [sic] about the inhabitants the [sic] Americas...it was evidently stolen by one Sidney Rigdon, a fellow who used to loiter around the shop. It surfaced later, in a modified form under the title THE BOOK OF MORMON...it appears that Smith and Rigdon spent considerable time together two years before Rigdon supposedly came into contact with Smith and Mormonism and was converted to it. The evidence is circumstantial, but it is so conclusive as to be irrefutable."

No evidence, irrefutable or otherwise, is produced by Brinkerhoff. Neither does he offer his evidence for changing the name of the manuscript.

In Sander's 'Some Modern Faiths' it is claimed, without supporting evidence, that, "Solomon Spaulding [deposited his] imaginary history...with a printer [and] died, and the manuscript was left in the printer's office. The printer himself died in 1826. There was a compositor at the office, named Sidney Rigdon.

It is also stated that, "These allegations were abusively denied by Rigdon."

Sanders in his 'Cults And Isms' claims that the Spaulding theory is correct adding the information that Spaulding died two days after leaving the manuscript at Patterson's. He also claims that, "Rigdon...frequented Patterson's shop."

If Sanders' information is accurate, it leaves little time for Baird's claim that Spaulding "suspicioned" that Rigdon had stolen it. It is fortunate for Rigdon's reputation that his richly documented personal history proves that he was neither thief, plagiarist or conspirator as regards either the Spaulding Manuscript, or the Book of Mormon. Spaulding wrote Manuscript Found about 1812. It has been said that he would amuse his neighbours by reading portions of it to them. Possibly their amusement provided him with the idea that it might be of interest to a wider public who would pay for the privilege of reading it. Consequently he sought to have it published. From New Salem, Ohio, where he wrote the work, he moved to Pittsburgh. Whilst in Pittsburgh he showed it to a printer called Patterson. Patterson retained the manuscript in order to read it and provide his opinion. Eventually he offered to print the book if Spaulding would agree to certain conditions and alterations. Spaulding would not agree to the conditions and took the manuscript back. Spaulding's widow confirms this to be so:

"At length the manuscript was returned to its author, and soon after we removed to Amity, Washington County, Pennsylvania, etc., where Mr Spaulding deceased in 1816. The manuscript then fell into my hands and was carefully preserved."

Evidence from Spaulding's widow establishes that she maintained possession of the manuscript from prior to 1814 until she permitted Philastus Hurlburt to borrow it in 1834 (long after the Book of Mormon had been published). If Rigdon ever saw the Spaulding document it must have been prior to 1816. This date can be pushed back two more years. A contemporary of Spaulding's made the statement that

"Spaulding left here [Conneaut, Ohio] in 1812, and I furnished him the means to carry him to Pittsburgh, where he said he would get the book printed and pay me."
Another interesting and significant statement by Lake reads:

A messenger was despatched to look up the widow of Spaulding, who was found residing in Massachusetts. From her we learned that Spaulding resided in Pittsburgh, about two years," etc.

This places Spaulding in Pittsburgh from 1812 to 1814. Therefore, if Rigdon had opportunity to read or steal the manuscript it must have been before 1814. But there are cogent rebutting reasons against this solution. In the first place Rigdon, who was 21 in 1814, was to be found at home on his father's farm and did not arrive in Pittsburgh until 1822 when the manuscript had been gone with Spaulding's widow for 8 years.

Add to this the fact that no one has come up with a single piece of evidence linking Rigdon with Joseph Smith until December of 1830, or with the production of the Book of Mormon which was undergoing printing from August 1829 until March 1830. Historical evidence for complicity in a plagiarised or counterfeit production of a book by Smith and Rigdon does not exist.

Enemies of Mormonism have besmirched the names of Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdery and Parley P Pratt in this matter. Their inability to furnish substantiation must persuade honest not to heed their slanders. It was in response to such a slander that Sidney Rigdon wrote:

"In your paper of the 18th instant, I see a letter signed by somebody calling herself Matilda Davison, pretending to give the origin of Mormonism, as she is pleased to call it, by relating moonshine story about a certain Solomon Spaulding, a creature with the knowledge of whose earthly existence I am entirely indebted to this production; for surely, until Philastus Hurlburt informed me that such a being lived, at some former period, I had not the most distant knowledge of his existence...it is only necessary to say, in relation to the whole story about Spaulding's writings being in the hands of Mr. Patterson, who was in Pittsburgh, and who is said to have kept a printing office, and my saying that I was concerned in the said office, etc., etc., is the most base of lies without even the shadow of truth."

That was Rigdon's measured response to the calumny which 'Matilda Davison's' [purported] letter aimed at his character. There is a suspicion that Mrs Davison did not write the letter, and comparisons of its syntax suggest that this may be the case. It has been suggested that a Reverend Storrs forged it over her name, although he denied it.

In his response Rigdon denies any knowledge of Solomon Spaulding and his literary creations, and any connection with the Patterson printing establishment in Pittsburgh.

Oliver Cowdery had a word to say to those who claiming that he was dishonestly involved in any way.

"I wrote with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages), as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith, as he translated it by the gift and power of God by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or, as it is called by the book, Holy Interpreters. I beheld with my eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters. That book is true. Sidney Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it myself as it fell from the lips of the Prophet. It contains the everlasting gospel, and came forth to the children of men in fulfilment of the revelations of John, where he says he saw an angel come with the everlasting gospel to preach to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. It contains the principles of salvation; and if you, my hearers, will walk by its light and obey its precepts, you will be saved with an everlasting salvation in the kingdom of God on high."

Parley P. Pratt is another often cited as a conspirator with Smith in producing the Book of Mormon. His response to those who insist that Rigdon wrote the Book of Mormon was spirited:

"Mr. Rigdon embraced the doctrine [Mormonism] through my instrumentality. I first presented the Book of Mormon to him. I stood upon the bank of the stream while he was baptized, and assisted to officiate in his ordination, and I myself was unacquainted with the system until some months after its organization, which was on the 6th of April 1830."

There the Spaulding origin of the Book of Mormon lies, and anyone that argues for a Spaulding origin for the sacred book is also lying! Even the virulent anti-Mormon Sandra tanner solidly rejects the Spaulding Theory. However, where there is a dollar to be made by writing against Mormons and a gullible section of the Christian community willing to pass their hard earned money to those that cynically pull the wool over their eyes time and time again, there will always be a ready market for this kind of ahistorical trash. More's the pity.

They have committed false report;
Moreover, they have spoken untruths;
Secondarily, they are slanders;
Sixthly, and lastly, they have belied...
Thirdly, they have verified unjust things;
And to conclude, they are lying knaves.
William Shakespeare

When I challenged a Christian minister that Mormonism had as much proof as Christianity, he gave me a copy of this book. He was right. Mormonism never looked the same to me after reading it. (I wish I had seen a similar book on Christianity then!) This book is an excellent short summary of arguments against the assertions of Mormons. For those interested in origins or a possible sequence of events explaining how Mormonism came about, this book provides an excellent foundation. Davis' central theory that the BOM (Book of Mormon) was adapted from a manuscript stolen from Solomon Spaulding has been rejected for poor reasons by many researchers, and is often not even mentioned by other authors. I found this book comparable to the single book best analyzing the origin of Judaism written by Sigmund Frued, Moses and Monotheism; or the one best book on the origins of Christianity, The Dead Sea Scrolls, by John Allegro.

Compare this book with The God Makers, by Ed Decker and Dave Hunt. Their book is mingled with much pro-Christianity proselytizing. Davis, Scales and Cowdry give plenty of specifics which can be checked, and in a short book outline enough information to give people locked into Mormon beliefs solid points to begin breaking away, without advancing the cause of a competing religion. This book would make an excellent gift to an individual or a library. Now out of print, if enough orders come in, it would be an excellent candidate for reprinting, perhaps as a series of specific debunkings of major religions. It would fit in well with Ibn Warraq's recently published volume on Islam.

I have been studying with Mormons for the past eight months. It was very hard at first to see through the "armor" of their beliefs. "Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon" is a great book which gives undeniable evidence to the origin of the Book of Mormon. Mormon claims and the inability to supply sufficent evidence to back up those claims is easily understood after reading this book. You might also like to read, "Mormons, How to Witness to Them", by John Farkas & David Reed. Please continue to pray for the Mormon believers that they will seek the truth.

When the original edition of this book first came out, I was challenged by a minister to read it. I remember holding the book in my hands, and being LDS, the first thing I noticed was that one of the authors was named Wayne L. Cowdrey. The back of the cover confirmed what I was wondering...it stated that he was a former member of the Mormon church and a direct descendent of Book of Mormon witness Oliver Cowdery. - WOW!
Well, I read the book, and it would be pretty damning... if true. Also around this time I remember all of this getting considerable national media attention.

I don't want to do a point-by-point critique of the original book, but here are some of my big concerns:

Oliver Cowdery's children all died without any offspring; therefore Wayne Cowdrey is not a descendent. Wayne Cowdrey joined the Mormon Church and left 6 months later, while at the very same time collaborating on "anti" stuff with coauthor Howard Davis. Is this a sincere "conversion"? Both of these points appear to be for seeking to establish credibility or trust but are based upon misleading and deception.

This book blatantly misrepresented handwriting expert Henry Silver, which sets up much of the foundational hypothesis of this book.
Following is quoted from a transcripted interview with Henry Silver by Robert Brown that was certified and signed Sept. 18, 1981
"...the reporter for the L.A. Times had written an article stating that I had examined and given my opinion that Solomon Spaulding's handwriting compared with some pages of the Smith manuscript, part of the Book of Mormon. It was nothing but a *&$%##&* lie." Time (magazine) published the same lie that the L.A. Times did."
He further stated in reference to the authors of this book:
"I called and got one of these three young fellows on the phone, one of the so called investigators... So I told him, I'm out of it, and I want no part of your case at all... I don't want any more of your deception."

And there were many more evidences of deception. If you are a called as a witness in court and you are caught in a lie, you lose your credibility. Imagine saying to the court: "Hey, I only lied about this part! Everything else I said is true!" The court is going to throw everything out!

OK, there will always be two sides to the actual Book of Mormon origins, and the people who have broken away from Mormonism are going to have to justify their decision. They cannot face idea that the Book of Mormon is divinely inspired without catching themselves in a disastrous error.

"O what a powerful reasoner self-interest is!" says Tertullian. I suppose that this very flawed book will well serve those wanting to reinforce their already existing beliefs.

The Book of Mormon does exist, so it did come from somewhere and it is here for everyone to carefully examine, and if you wish to compare for yourself the writings of Solomon Spaulding, probably the most convenient source is your local LDS bookstore.

"Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon?" IS an important question. "Who has really Read the Book of Mormon?" is also a question with wonderful and eternal implications!

If you are interested in this theory, you ought to read the original Spaulding manuscript, and compare for yourself. Don't trust the author of some book to determine your eternal future. If you don't want to be a mormon, that is your choice, but decide for yourself. (...)